On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 7:33 AM, Ingo Bürk <ad...@airblader.de> wrote: > @Don > > Alright, then this was a misunderstanding. My apologies.
Apology not necessary! Misunderstandings can happen due to problems on the output and/or input sides. Reading my message, I can see how you might have interpreted it as you did. /Don > > > Ingo > > On 04/05/2015 01:25 PM, Donald Allen wrote: >> On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 7:15 AM, Ingo Bürk <ad...@airblader.de> wrote: >>> This is getting meta, but (in a general sense) this: >>> >>>> don't complain, send a patch >>> is a pretty unhelpful reaction in my eyes. So we can't open bugs if we >>> don't provide the fix as well? We can't ask for features without >>> implementing it? Most of us are busy and to be honest, I don't have the >>> time to dig into the source code of *every* application I'm using if I >>> feel that an improvement can be made. I wouldn't find time to eat, sleep >>> or earn my living anymore. Of course it's a good thing if someone does; >>> I just argue it shouldn't be a requirement. >> You don't need to. Even in the extreme world of OpenBSD, no one argues >> that it's a *requirement*; the developers fix bugs reported by users >> who don't offer patches. "Don't complain, send a patch" is their >> (less-than-diplomatic) way of encouraging people to contribute. My >> point, perhaps not expressed clearly enough, was that open source >> gives us all the option of making contributions, as Tony Crisci did, >> so this was an example of how open source encourages teamwork, >> communities. >> >>> That being said, I didn't think any of this was dramatic and I didn't >>> think Michael's or Jeff's responses were in any way "unreasonable". >>> Someone asked a question, Michael made his stance, Tony provided a >>> reasonable solution. >>> >>> >>> Ingo >>> >>> >>> On 04/05/2015 01:04 PM, Donald Allen wrote: >>>> On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 3:39 AM, Jeff Abrahamson <j...@purple.com> wrote: >>>>> (To be clear and before anyone has a chance to remark on it: that was >>>>> meant >>>>> in support of the OP of the question, not meant as a chastisement of >>>>> Michael. Sorry if it read a bit as the latter.) >>>> Yes, it did read that way, pretty clearly. It's good that you realized >>>> it yourself and sent the above. >>>> >>>> While I think you are correct that it's unintended behavior -- a bug >>>> -- but not important functionally, I think Michael's response is >>>> perfectly reasonable, as the developer of good software for which we >>>> must all remember he is giving us free of charge. I don't know >>>> Michael, but I have seen indications that he's a busy guy. As someone >>>> who had a 45-year career in software development, I can tell you that >>>> just continuing development of i3 and providing the level of support >>>> he does is a big job. And that's in addition to whatever he does to >>>> earn his living and have a life. So, without trying to speak for him, >>>> I'm guessing his response came from that perspective. It was also a >>>> bit like the old joke about he fellow who says to the doctor "Doctor, >>>> when I do this, it hurts". To which the doctor responded "Don't do >>>> that". >>>> >>>> I would also add that we are living in an open source world. Part of >>>> the point of open source is that we can all contribute to the >>>> development of a piece of software. Read or listen to any of Richard >>>> Stallman's descriptions of his issue with a laser printer many years >>>> ago that resulted in his leading us in this direction and you see that >>>> collaboration between users and developers as at the core of the open >>>> source movement. The original poster expressed a concern about a >>>> certain behavior in i3, Michael essentially said "I have more >>>> important things to work on, from which you will benefit, so just >>>> avoid provoking that behavior", and then Tony Crisci suggested a fix >>>> that doesn't require Michael's involvement. This is the way it's >>>> supposed to work. Read the OpenBSD mailing lists. While the tone is >>>> too nasty for my taste, especially when Theo de Raadt gets involved, >>>> he and they have a point: don't complain, send a patch! >>>> >>>> /Don Allen >>>> >>>>> Jeff Abrahamson >>>>> +33 6 24 40 01 57 >>>>> +44 7920 594 255 <-- only if I'm in the UK >>>>> >>>>> http://jeff.purple.com/ >>>>> http://blog.purple.com/jeff/ >>>>> >>>>> On 5 April 2015 at 09:30, Jeff Abrahamson <j...@purple.com> wrote: >>>>>> Wait, that's not a very empathetic response. I agree with you, Michael, >>>>>> that this isn't a huge problem functionally, but it *looks* ugly and it >>>>>> *looks* like unintended behavior. And that's reason enough for the OP to >>>>>> raise the issue, in case no one had noticed. >>>>>> >>>>>> From there, it's certainly reasonable if you want to say that it's not >>>>>> your priority to fix. And to invite a patch, whether or not you want to >>>>>> offer tips on how it might be patched. >>>>>> >>>>>> Jeff Abrahamson >>>>>> +33 6 24 40 01 57 >>>>>> +44 7920 594 255 <-- only if I'm in the UK >>>>>> >>>>>> http://jeff.purple.com/ >>>>>> http://blog.purple.com/jeff/ >>>>>> >>>>>> On 5 April 2015 at 09:18, Michael Stapelberg <mich...@i3wm.org> wrote: >>>>>>> What’s the problem with this behavior? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It surely is technically possible to avoid it, but why bother? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 12:14 AM, Hector <c1b3rh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> Dear I3wm list , >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Recently I was using my laptop with i3wm, my version is 4.8 >>>>>>>> (2014-06-15, branch "4.8") I run debian testing, I couldn't say that >>>>>>>> I >>>>>>>> haven't fallen in love with it,but checking the option to exit from >>>>>>>> my current session if I press once, I get the normal message set >>>>>>>> by the default configuration, but if I press many times >>>>>>>> $mod+Shift+e I get something like in the attached picture. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Is there any way to add some snipe of code to solve it if I press many >>>>>>>> times?. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Can anybody confirm this behavior maybe I'm wrong and it just >>>>>>>> happend to me. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best Regards, >>>>>>>> Hector. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>> Michael >
